Month: September 2019

Archive for September, 2019


Sanjay Dattatray Kakade v. A CIT (2019) 70 ITR 519 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007– Retraction of statement–Filing the return admitting the additional income after retraction the assessee is not entitle to exemption-No requirement of recording satisfaction before imposing penalty-Immunity from penalty–Conditions to be satisfied cumulatively i.e. surrender undisclosed income and to specify manner in which such income derived ,and pay taxes with interest in respect of undisclosed income along with return. CIT(A) has the power to enhance the penalty.[S. 132(4), 251, 271AAA(2)]

DCIT v. Rajendra Agarwal (2019) 71 ITR 518 (Jaipur)(Tirb.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment-Long term capital gains-Surrender and disclosure u/s. 132(4)-In absence of any incriminating material found during search and seizure action would not lead to conclusion that assessee has concealed particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. [S. 10(38), 45, 132(4), 153A]

ACIT v. St. Antony Timber Depot and vice versa (2019) 71 ITR 1 (Cochin)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–CIT(A) confirmed the penalty only in respect of 1/3rd addition-Matter remanded to CIT(A). [S. 153A]

Simran K. Sayyed (Ms.) v. ITO(2019) 70 ITR 472 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Additional ground-Failure by Assessing officer to delete inappropriate words and parts in relevant paragraph of notice-Notice not specifying issued for concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income-Levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 274]

Nitinbhai Tulsidas Chottani v. Dy. CIT (2019) 70 ITR 496 (Ahd.) (Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Concealment-Assessing officer not referring to seized material—Concealed income should be represented by some incriminating material during course of search—Difference in computation of cost of acquisition not concealment of income. [S. 153A]

P. R. Associates v. A CIT (2019) 70 ITR 469 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 269SS : Penalty—Acceptance of loan in cash in excess of specified limit—assessee’s business inoperative for past years—assessee borrowing from bank and private money lenders for past years— assessee borrowing money from unorganised financial sector in cash for repaying financial liabilities—assessee declaring loss in return—reasonable cause—Imposition of penalty not warranted. [S. 273B]

ITO v. Amarchand P. Shah (Late) (2019) 73 ITR 588/( 2020) 185 DTR 171 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal–Appeals-Monetary limits for appeals by department–Exceptions to be construed strictly.

Hari Mohan Sharma & Madan Mohan Sharma v. ACIT (2018) 71 ITR 18 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)–Powers-Capital gains-New source of income- Commissioner not competent to enhance an assessment on point not all considered by AO or raised by assessee-CIT(A) is also not entitled to enhance assessment holding sale itself was bogus and treat income u/s. 68 [S. 54F, 68]

Divisional Railway Manager, Jaipur v. ACIT (TDS) (2019) 70 ITR 590 (Jaipur) (Trib.)

S. 246A : Appeal to commissioner (appeals)—limitation for filing— condonation of delay—deduction of tax at source—failure to deduct —government organisation—”sufficient cause”—delay condoned-Matter remanded to CIT(A).

Dimension Data Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 73 ITR 213 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax-non-resident-liability on payer to deduct tax at source while making payment to non-resident-No liability on non-resident to pay advance tax-Interest is not chargeable. [S. 195]